Manoj Kumar Lenka Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the StateOpposite Party. Perused the bail application as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶18

The present bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the Petitioner for regular bail in connection with C.T. Case No.389 of 2025, arising out of Biridi P.S. Case No.311 of 2025, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Jagatsinghpur, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

¶19

Page 1 of 4.

¶20

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is languishing in jail custody since 02.02.2026. He further contended that although the occurrence took place on 15.12.2025, however the Petitioner was not arrested from the spot. He further submitted that the Petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of the coaccused statement. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, learned counsel for the Petitioner drawing attention of this Court to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh -vrs.State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1 , submitted before this Court that the statement of the co-accused cannot be used as evidence, so far as the present Petitioner is concerned. He also contended that the investigation in this case has progressed substantially in the meantime and final charge sheet is likely to be filed very soon. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that Petitioner belongs to the locality, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. He further submitted that though the Petitioner is having one criminal antecedent of the allegation of transporting of commercial quantity of Ganja, however he has been released on bail in that case. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be released on bail in any stringent terms and conditions.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the release of the Petitioner on bail on the ground of gravity and seriousness of the allegation. He further contended that in the

¶22

Page 2 of 4.

¶23

event the Petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility that he might abscond from justice which would eventually cause delay in conclusion of the trial. He further submitted that the cases of illegal transportation of contraband Ganja are on rise in State of Odisha now-a-days. Therefore, no leniency should be shown to the accused persons who are involved in such type of offence. In such view of the matter, it is submitted that the prayer for bail of the Petitioner be rejected at this juncture.

¶24

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the surrounding facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court observes that nothing has been recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of the present Petitioner, therefore, the bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted to the present Petitioner and the fact that the Petitioner is implicating in this case on the basis of the co-accused statement, this Court is inclined to release the Petitioner on bail.

¶25

Hence, it is directed that the Petitioner be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs.45,000/(Rupees forty five thousand) with two local solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court in seisin over the matter. The release of the Petitioner shall also be subject to such other terms and conditions as would be fixed by the court in seisin over the matter. Violation of any of the terms and conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.

¶26

Page 3 of 4.

¶27

It is further directed that the bail granted to the Petitioner is subject to the condition that the court below shall verify whether the Petitioner is having any criminal antecedent of similar nature. In the event it is found that the Petitioner is having more than one criminal antecedent of similar nature, then this bail order shall automatically stand revoked.

¶28